151 
StZ26p 





We 





Byentg 
Ae 


--2 





_ 4 


es 


sm 


— 
ss 


fe 
ee 
f ot 


- Shas. 
ee 


yy Fae 
eer, 





CENTRAL CIRCULATION BOOKSTACKS 


The person charging this material is re- 
sponsible for ‘ts renewal or its return to 
the library from which it was borrowed 
on or before the Latest Date stamped 
below. You may be charged a minimum 
fee of $75.00 for each lost book. 

Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons 
for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from 


the University. 
TO RENEW CALL TELEPHONE CENTER, 333-8400 


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


When renewing by phone, write new due date below 
previous due date. L162 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2021 with funding from 
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 


https://archive.org/details/osychologicaltesOOstan 


PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS 
OF MUSICAL TALENT 


Eastman School of Music 


BY 
HAZEL M. STANTON, PH. D. 


EASTMAN SCHOOL oF Music 
THE UNIVERSITY OF RocHESTER 
ROCHESTER, N.Y. 








FOREWORD 


Believing that the musical talent tests invented by Dr. Carl Emil 
Seashore have reached the stage where they are of practical value 
to the administration of a school of music, the Eastman School of 
Music has adopted these tests as a help in selecting students for its 
courses and as a practical aid to vocational guidance. The results 
obtained by Dr. Stanton, the head of this department in the East- 
man School, have been not only interesting but of great value. 
They have given indications of students’ capacities which before 
could have been obtained only after months of study under a careful 
and observing teacher. They have been the means of discouraging 
students whose lack of fundamental musical capacity would have 
been a constant and in some cases insurmountable handicap. Above 
all they have tended to promote honesty in the estimate of the abil- 
ity of the students and have prevented in many cases serious mis- 
takes in the choice of a profession. 


‘ HOWARD HANSON 
Director, Eastman School of Music 


Sh 
0) 


i 
f 


) 


ue 
ive 





PREFACE 


The Eastman School of Music is a pioneer in applying scientific 
methods to the individual study of those who desire musical train- 
ing. For a period of four years, psychological measurements of 
musical capacities have been given to several thousand of its stu- 
dents, and each student has been rated by teachers for numerous 
factors involved in musical achievement. 

During this period, many inquiries have been received regarding 
the results of this work. And now a sufficient length of time has 
passed to make our findings significant. The more significant of 
these findings and what has grown out of them is now ready to give 
to those who have inquired, and to those musicians, educators and 
parents who are interested in the future development and musical 
growth of the country. 

I am fully convinced that every child should profit by the guidance 
which is possible when the degree of his musical talent is known. 
In the past, one has been so dependent upon the advice and personal 
opinion of a musician or friend regarding his musical study. And 
too often one finds that the advice of one musician is contradictory 
to that of another. Both opinions, however, must be considered 
because they come from musicians whose opinion we trust. What 
can be done about it? Many would-be students are drifting music- 
ally, waiting to be encouraged or discouraged. Perhaps another 
friend says to continue music lessons and after many years of study 
a musician says that it is no use. This remark may spur one 
person to go on and completely stop another. Shall we continue 
to be advised and influenced entirely by personal opinion? Musical 
talent is not just a beautiful voice; a beautiful voice may be possessed 
by one with little musical talent, or one with great talent may not 
have a beautiful voice. Regardless of the particular way in which 
the musical talent is expressed, everyone possesses musical talent 
in some degree. Many times, by mere chance, this talent is ex- 
pressed by means of the piano, or on the violin, or by the voice, or 
by no audible means of any kind, yet the talent may be there, per- 
haps dormant throughout life. Now if there is any way in which 


science can discover the potentiality of this talent and encourage 
its use in the broadest musical training possible, we will be preparing 
the real musical students of the future. And science is ready to 
assist and give its opinion, which may or may not substantiate the 
opinion of the particular voice or piano teacher. From scientific 
data at hand compared with the estimates of talent of hundreds of 
students made by many teachers of music, science is able to offer 
real help in a way that has proven to be most fair. 

It is the aim of this report to tell you what the results of measure- 
ment show and what the various teachers say about the talent of 
many students. 

I wish to acknowledge my appreciation of the co-operation of 
Mr. M. B. Folsom, of the Eastman Kodak Company, in the pres- 
entation and charting of the statistical data. 


April, 1925 H. M.S. 


CONTENTS 


Introduction - - —- -— 
Extremes of Talent - = 
Questionary - - - - 
Rating Blank for Teachers — 
Individual Talent Charts —- 
The Ninety-nine - - -—- 


Teachers’ Ratings of Those Who Tested High and Low 


Tests of Those Rated by Teachers Highest and Lowest in 


‘alent — rye 


Tests and Teachers’ Ratings for Those Tested in 1921-1922 — 
January, 1924, Status of Students Tested in 1921-1922 — 
Tests and Teachers’ Ratings for Those Tested in October, 1922 


January, 1924, Status of Students Tested in October, 1922 


Student Fluctuation in a Music School 


Teachers’ Ratings of Talent 


Summary of Data Regarding Teachers’ Ratings and Tests 


Test Results and Teachers’ Estimates of Two Selected Groups 


Conclusion. - - - - 

Appendix i aes | lero ca 
1. Questionary for Adults 
2. Questionary for Children 


3. Rating Blank for Use of Teachers 


PAGE 


10 
10 
11 
18 
20 


22 
23 
26 
ey 
28 
28 
a4! 
39 
39 
42 
44 
45 
48 
49 


ia 
WP 


WAGs 
4s 
ia 


: ‘ 


es) 
i 


*" 
sf : 
hae 


f i, rig ik 7 


t 


‘J van 

bt at aK 
oe . 

riya 
a 





PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS 
OVE S| GA LAM ba Ey Nv 


EASTMAN SCHOOL OF MUSIC 


INTRODUCTION 


The reception of all sound occurs in the organ of hearing, the ear. 
One frequently hears the expression among students of music, “I 
have a very good ear.’’ Such an utterance is usually made by 
students and performers of musical recognition. Many years ago, 
a psychologist,! interested in the many problems connected with 
sound, heard such a remark and wondered about its meaning. As 
a result, measurements of the fundamental capacities involved in 
musical talent were devised, standardized, and given quantitative 
meaning. | 

Many different degrees of musical talent exist and are now rec- 
ognized. As many varying degrees of talent can be expressed as 
there are divisions in a measuring scale, one which extends, for ex- 
ample, from 1 to 100. These varying degrees of talent are due to 
inborn capacities, capacities which exist as they are regardless of 
the extent of musical training and environment. Years of intensive 
musical training will accomplish. three, four, five or tenfold more 
for one student than for another. The capacity of the one is natu- 
rally greater than the other for musical achievement. 

These capacities of musical talent which can now be measured 
are the sense of pitch, the sense of intensity, the sense of time, the 
sense of rhythm, the sense of consonance and tonal memory.? 

The history, background and scientific reliability of these tests 
have been given most interestingly in The Psychology of Musical 
Talent,®> by C. E. Seashore. However, a few of the outstanding 





1Dr. C. E. Seashore, State University of Iowa. 


2Seashore Measurements of Musical Talent, recorded on Columbia phonograph 
records. 


3 The Psychology of Musical Talent, by C. E. Seashore, 288 pages, Silver-Burdett 
Company. 


points regarding the tests may well be emphasized here. First, 
they are fundamentally measures of specific musical capacities, and 
not measures of musical achievement. They tell us what a person 
has to accomplish with and not what a person has accomplished. 
Second, these tests are measurements of only a few of the most 
fundamental capacities necessary for musical achievement. Third, 
they may be given to children and adults, musically untrained as 
well as trained. Fourth, the tests should be given under the direc- 
tion of those who are trained in their administration and their 
interpretation. 

Since the Eastman School of Music opened its doors to those 
desiring musical training, an intensive study has been made of all 
students. The quantitative information obtained consists chiefly 
of the six measurements of musical talent.4 The qualitative in- 
formation consists of estimates of talent made by teachers, and a 
questionary of musical environment, training, activity, interests, 
memory and imagination. 

During the year 1923-24, students were dropped from the school 
as a result of this information. At the beginning of the academic 
year 1924-1925, the faculty of the school voted unanimously to’ 
admit only those who measured above a certain score. 

There are reasons for a music school faculty taking such action. 
Many of these reasons will be given in this report. 





‘In the earlier test material used, the six tests were the sense of pitch, sense of 
intensity, sense of time, sense of consonance, tonal memory and auditory imagery. 
Later the auditory imagery test was omitted and the rhythm test added. 


EXTREMES OF TALENT 
Deere pty eee cee) PER CENTIL Go ee 


HF 3~Vioiw 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 
Sense or Prren | 







SENSE OF Time 

Sense or Consonance; | |_| 
TonawL Memory 

AvoiTrory IMAGERY 


TeacHers Ramne of Arent l/ ALAA ALYY YI IA 


CHART 1 


EZ 2—-PiANO 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 


SENSE oF PitcH 
EY a 


Sense of intensity | | 


| iim EN 
SENSE OF Time : se Sea | (ea a 
SENSE oF CONSONANCE| se ee ee 
pagel ica vem 
ts Renee racers 


TONAL Memory 
AudiTorY IMAGERY 
FC a Ee 
CE a Ee 
BPA CR 
a 
ORT Bea ie 1 ea 


CHART 2 
Chart 1, HF3, is the picture of the talent of an 11 year old boy. 
Chart 2, EZ2, is the picture of the talent of an adult girl. HF3 
has ‘‘very great”’ talent, EZ2 has ‘“‘very little’ talent. ‘‘Very great”’ 
talent means that HF3 responds to the tests best when compared 
with hundreds of others. ‘‘Very little’ talent means that EZ2 
responds to the tests the poorest when compared with hundreds of 
others. 
HF3 is a violin preparatory pupil. He was in the seventh grade, 
in public school, when tested,’ and had had only 55 half-hour violin 















RESULTS or TEstTs 







TEACHERS Ramine of TALENT 


5 The mental alertness score was obtained from tests given by the psychological 
department of the public schools. 
9 


lessons. The result of his tests (the talent chart) is classified as an 
A chart (the highest classification). His violin teacher rates him 
A in talent. He is now sixteen years old, a senior in high school, 
continuing his violin study, participating in student orchestras, and 
playing first violin in a boys’ string quartette. 

EZ2 was an adult, seventeen years old, with a grammar school 
education and one year ataseminary. She had taken 192 half-hour 
piano lessons when tested. She had always had difficulty in singing 
the melody of easy tunes. The result of her tests (the talent chart) 
is an E chart (the lowest classification). Her teacher rated her E in 
talent. She discontinued voluntarily from the school after a few 
months of study. 

This great difference which exists in degree of talent has a far 
reaching significance for students of music, for teachers of music, 
for parents, for music departments of schools and colleges, for music 
schools and for communities interested in musical achievement. 


QUESTIONARY 


In addition to the tests, a detailed questionary® is given to each 
applicant to the school. .This questionary covers sources of in- 
formation regarding general information, musical environment, 
musical activity, musical interest, musical memory and imagination. 
These data give valuable qualitative material which supplements in 
a serviceable way the quantitative data obtained from the tests. No 
collective information from the questionaries will be included in this 
report; only single items will be mentioned in relation to the talent 
charts. 


RATING BLANK FOR TEACHERS 


The principal criterion by which the significance of test results. 
is judged is teachers’ estimates of musical talent. These estimates 
are made for each pupil on a rating blank,’ and reported to the office 
semi-annually. 

The estimate of musical talent, the first item on the rating blank, 
is the rating used for comparison with the test results.. The ratings 
of the other items help to give an analytical profile of each student’s 
talent. 

The scope of estimates of talent charts (test results) and teachers’ 
ratings range from A (the highest) to E (the lowest) including A, 





6 Appendices 1 and 2. 
7 Appendix 3. 


10 


B, C+, C—, D, E. The various classifications of test results will 
be shown in the following charts. 


INDIVIDUAL TALENT CHARTS 


One of the first studies of test results and teachers’ estimates of 
talent was made by selecting individual talent charts at regular 
intervals from each of the different classified groups of A charts, 
B charts, C+ charts, etc., out of a total of 248 talent charts. There 
were fourteen talent charts in all, three A charts, three B charts, 
three C+ charts, two C— charts, two D charts and one E chart. 
All of these fourteen charts are presented in order to show what 
constitutes an A talent chart, a B talent chart, etc.; in order to note 
the variety of charts in each classification, because no two A charts 
or B charts or C+ charts, etc., are alike; in order to compare the 
teachers’ estimate of talent, which is rated independently of the 
test results;®? and in order to give a few facts of the more recent his- 
tory of the case in so far as it is known. 


A Talent Charts 
Charts 3, 4 and 5 are classified as A talent charts. 


perenne) ee PPR CONTI Oe 


BE4 — Hol = 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 


ANNO 
Sense of Prren CS a se a 
Senise oF INTENSITY {tg 
SENSE. OF Time. Fa a a 
SENSE of CONSONANCE OLR tea IVR Bie 
ToNAL Memory ee es ea 
Avoitrory. IMAGERY 2 ae ees a 
Pe ee ee 
alg ve tine | NU ama Wet aisfOMm|Ahe Ts 4 


iP Ee 




















Resuits or Tests 


CHART 3 
E4 was a candidate for the bachelor of music degree, concentrat- 
ing in violin. The private teachers’ ratings of talent were C+ in 
violin’? and B in piano. Later ratings of talent were B in violin 
(by a different teacher) and Binorgan. This student was graduated 





8 Teachers are not informed of the test results for their pupils. Their estimates 
of talent are made independently of test results. 
® C+ is the highest rating ever given by this teacher. 


11 


in June, 1923. Since that time she has done concert work, private 
teaching and orchestral conducting. Music is her vocation. 
RUE Ne tea) Ue ok a ey ee rar ee ee 


EM 1-VictIN 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 % 100 


Sense or Pitcr Pals EL EE ee eae ae | 
eee or INTENSITY itt te mar 
ik 







Tonal Memory 
AvoiToryY IMAGERY 


RESULTS oF TEsTs RRR Mery Ni A 


TEACHERS RAmING of TALENT | Miotin” ALAA EA 
RCTS CH RAR es 
CHART 4 

Mr was a candidate for the bachelor of music degree, concen- 
trating in violin. The private teachers’ ratings of talent were A in 
violin, A in Piano and later a rating of A in composition. This 
student was graduated in June, 1923, and accepted a position as 
supervisor of instrumental music in a city school system. 


peice ee PERCENTILE eee 
EV 1~Voice 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 © 100 


Sense. or Prren Mee Sse 
SENSE oF INTENSITY RE Se en’ Vt mod 
Sense or Time. RRM? mee: 
SENSE oF CONSONANCE ert BE.BRi 

TONAL Memory A lov) ta ae i 

AvuoiTory IMAGERY ee poe aa aah aa 7 a ae 

rel eae oe 

a 

FZ ES TS vs 

ee. PRC en | (ee 

WAVAVAVAVAVA Wn Wn Wn Wi (< 


CHART 5 
Vrisacandidate for the Eastman School certificate, concentrat- 
ing in voice. The private teachers’ rating of talent was C+ in 
voice, followed by three ratings of B and a fourth of B+ (all by the 
same teacher), and three successive ratings of C+ in piano. This 
student is a candidate for graduation in June, 1925. 
12 













RESULTS or Tests 





TEACHERS RATING oF TALENT 


B Talent Charts 
Charts 6, 7 and 8 are all classified as B talent charts. 


eee ee ee PERCENTILE 


EH42-Piano = 0:10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9% 100 


SENSE of Prrert ee ee a alg RO aE 
Sense or intensity | | | | | Y {| [ if] 
SENSE oF Time. ol | a aro sa 
SENSE - oF CONSONANCE 1S a ag ES 
ToNAL Memory ita DES Ie 
AvoiToRY IMAGERY Pd CS a a al 
[a] CRO Bk SA 
Ligh a ee 
GR a ae a 
(Te od SE 
Teacrers Ranneor Twent|/|/// AYE | | | ict 
CHART 6 | | 
H42 was a preparatory piano pupil, 10 years old. Her first 
rating of talent was C+ in piano. Four later ratings of talent by the 


same teacher were B, C+, C+, C+. 


Ems2 Fano 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 8 % 10 


perseommrrermen (0 | he pududiaga 
SENSE oF INTENSITY Hep ae | fa 


Sense or Time 
















Resutts or Tests 










Tae Memory 
Avoirory Imacery 


eecx gq | |8 


Directors 
RATING 


Ruano >< 





CHART 7 

M 52 was a preparatory piano and violin pupil, 10 years old. Her 
first ratings were B in piano and B in violin with a director’s rating 
of B in piano. One later rating in talent was B by the same piano 


teacher. 
13 


BV B=-ViCLIN 0 10 20 3 40 50 6 70 80 90 100 


Sense or Prren hac? | see es awe 
Senise oF INTENSITY tt+8 Omi aes 
Sense or Time 
SENSE oF CONSONANCE 

TonAL Memory 

AuoITORY IMAGERY 














RESULTS or TESTS 


TeacHers Ranneor Txenti|AS AY) | | | | | ice 


CHART 8 


V8 was a preparatory violin pupil, 16 years old. Her first rating 


of talent was C— in violin, and the second rating C+, by the same 
teacher. 


C+ Talent Charts 
Charts 9, 10 and 11 are classified as C+ talent charts. 
PERCENTILE eee 
Er40—- Piano 0 10 20 30 40 50 & 70 8 90 10 


Sense or Prrers SER Aee Ree 






TONAL Memory 
AvoiTorY IMacERY 


RESULTS oF Tests FEE EE Bish Ct 
TEACHERS Ranine of Taentl/ 4 Y/Y | | | ice 


BHR 
ON | | | tt le 
CHART 9 


H4o was a preparatory piano pupil, 13 years old. Her first 
ratings of talent were C++ in piano by her private teacher and C— 
in piano by the director. A second rating is C+ in talent by the 
same piano teacher. 


Direcrors 
RATING 


14 


CE face ean EL PAO AO On a OCT Tn oY He a 
EM S8<—PiANO 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 


Sense or Piters 


TonAL Memory 
AvoiTory IMAGERY 





CHART 10 

M58 was a preparatory piano pupil, 14 years old. Her first 
ratings of talent were C— in piano by her teacher, and C+ by the 
director. 


EW I2— PIANO 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 
Sense or Pitcr 


TONAL Memory 
AuoIToRY IMAGERY 


CTC ee aT 
CE 
RESULTS or TESTS ae: feet Ae Sa) ae Ct 


TEACHERS RATING oF TALENT A VAVA es i Ct 





CHART 11 
Wi2 was a candidate for the Eastman School certificate, con- 
centrating in piano. Her first rating of talent was C+ in piano. 
Three later ratings of talent by the same teacher were B, B and C+. 


C— Talent Charts 
Charts 12 and 13 are classified as C— talent charts. 





EM 4c =o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9 100 
Sense of Pitcr 


TONAXWY Memory 
AvoiTory IMAGERY. 





CHART 12 

Mr4wasa candidate for the bachelor of music degree, concen- 
trating in voice. Her first ratings of talent were A in voice and C— 
in piano. Later voice ratings by the same voice teacher were C+, 
C+ and C+. Later piano ratings by the same piano teacher were 
C+,C— and C. This student was graduated from the school in 
June, 1924. She now teaches music and drawing in a rural school. 


i ee ee 


ET I8—Viouin 0 10 20 30 = 50 60 70 80 90 100 





Sense of Pitcr 


mes 
Sense or Intensity | | | eo 
SENSE OF Time. i a 


TeNAL Memory 
AUDITORY IMAGERY 


Soe 
a Eh 
RESULTS of TESTS (GES sates eat ae c- 


TEACHERS RaAnNe oF TALENT WAVAVAVAVAVA ia Ct 


CHART 13 
T18 was a preparatory violin pupil, 15 years old. Her first 
rating of talent was C+ in violin. No further ratings were obtained 


before she discontinued. 
16 


D Talent Charts 
Charts 14 and 15 are classified as D talent charts. 


Pp 

EH SPIANO 0 10 20 30 40 50 6& 70 8 90 100 
SEnse or Pitcr A 
SENSE OF INTENSITY 
SENSE oF Time 





TONAL Memory 
AvoiTtory IMAGERY 


RESULTS of TESTs 






TeAcHers Ratino or Tacentl////4/7q {| | | | | ie~ 


CHART 14 
H 3, was a special piano pupil, 26 years old. Only one rating of 
C— in piano talent was obtained before he discontinued. 
ES42-PiANO) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 
Sense of Pitcr | | 


TonaAL Memory 
AvoiToryY IMAGERY 


ReEsuLTs or Tésts Ce a Oe ae D 
Co Ed sO a a 
Teacrers RanmeorTaentl/ 4) | | | | | | | io 
spat 
4054 i 


CHART 15 
S42 was a preparatory piano pupil, 15 yearsold. Her first rating 
of talent was D in piano, followed by the same teacher’s rating of 
C— in piano, and later D in piano. The director’s rating of her 
pianistic talent was C—. This girl was dropped by the school. 
ry 


E Talent Charts 
Chart 16 is classified as an E talent chart. 


yo les OS ee creer ee 
B.S 14- Piano 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 
Senae or Pircn 


Tonaw Memory 
AvoITORY IMAGERY 


Resutsor Tests [Ji | | | | {| | [| e 
Teachers Ranne or Tacent 4Z/Y/Yy | | | | | ie 


CHART 16 

S14 was a preparatory piano pupil, 18 yearsold. Her first rating 

of talent was C— in piano. She discontinued before further 

estimates of talent were obtained. The dotted vertical lines mean 

that those tests were not responded to as well as the poorest response 
of hundreds of adults. 


This completes the presentation of the 14 individual talent charts 
of the various classifications, showing the test results and successive 
ratings of talent by teachers over a period of time. These charts 
give a typical cross section of the whole group tested, ranging from 
high degree of talent to low degree of talent, and emphasize the pos- 
sibility and reliability of predicting musical talent by measurement. 


THE NINETY-NINE 


The first study of group material included the talent charts (test 
results) of 248 students with ratings in talent from thirty-five differ- 
ent teachers. Ninety-nine of these students had, in addition to the 
talent chart and private teacher’s estimate of talent, a rating of 
talent by the director of the school. In chart 17, the relationship 
of these three sources of information is shown by the height of each 
of the three pillars erected at A, B, C, D and E. The numbers 
below each pillar are the number of students represented by each 
pillar. For example, the tests classified nine students as A in talent, 
the director rated two students as A in talent, and the teachers 
rated six students A in talent. The tests selected more A and B 


18 





talent than either the director or teachers. Private teachers made 
the most C ratings of talent. It seems to be habitual for private 
teachers to bulk their estimates of talent in the average zone; this 
is especially true of the first ratings made of new pupils. 


Ratings of 99 Stvaents by Tests, Director and Teachers 


Gl Test Director Teacher 





RMS So p»py 
Ry 





ST 


CHART 17 


The norm from which the test classification is obtained is madeup 
of a thousand or more individuals, to whom each new person tested 
is compared for a classification of superior (A), excellent(B), average 
(C), poor (D) and very poor (E). Individual teacher’s standards 
or norms are greatly influenced by each teacher’s own experience 
or personal equation. It is difficult for one teacher to consider a 
large enough group for a fair comparison of a single student to the 
group. Also, a teacher’s estimate of talent is oftentimes at the 
mercy of achievement on the part of the student. The uncertainty 
of talent being above or below the average is, no doubt, cause for 
teachers to rate many students as average (C) in talent and later 
rate these same pupils higher or lower. 

If, on the basis of the test norm, we call the lowest 10% E, and 
the highest 10% A, and the middle 40% C, etc., we have no assur- 
ance that a teacher, in the long run, will consider as many as 10%, 
that is, two out of twenty, or ten out of one hundred, as A pupils in 
talent. Neither do we know that the A, B, C, D and E ratings of 
one teacher signify the same classification as the A, B, C, D and E 
estimates of another teacher, or the A, B, C, Dand E results of the 
tests. Yet for expediency, we are using the same letters for quan- 
titative results (tests) as we are for qualitative estimates (teachers’ 
ratings), and assuming that a teacher’s C+ may be comparable 


19 


with a test record of C+. In comparing teachers’ ratings alone, 
the C++ of one teacher is evidently not the C+ of another teacher. 
There is great need of adjusting the standards of different teachers’ 
estimates. Some of our first efforts in this direction will be ex- 
plained later on in this report. 


TEACHERS’ RATINGS OF THOSE WHO TESTED 
HIGH AND LOW 


Another study was made of the high 10% and low 10% out of a 
total of 300 students tested in 1921-1922. In order to know how 
the teachers were rating the talent for those who tested high and 
those who tested low, the highest 10% and the lowest 10% in the 
tests were selected. The highest 10% included all the A talent 
charts, and a portion of the highest B talent charts. The lowest 
10% in the tests included all the E and D talent charts and a portion 
of the lowest C— talent charts. 


Teachers Rating of Highest 10% and Lowest 40% of Students according to Tests 
1921 - 1922 
APPARENT TALENT 


B Highest 10% | Lowest 10% 





High 20% Bo% A3.3% 6.6 % O% 
Low eo) 3.3 10. 26.6 416.6 6.5 
B Ct c= Oo , 
CHART 18 


In chart 18, the black pillars represent teachers’ estimates of 
talent for those who tested high, the dotted pillars represent 
teachers’ estimates of talent for those who tested low. Of those 
who tested A or B, teachers rated 6 or 20% of them A in talent, 9 
or 30% B in talent, 13 or 43.3% C+ in talent, 2 or 6.6% C— in 
talent, and none D or E in talent. Of those who tested C—, D 
and E, the teachers rated none A in talent, one or 3.3% B, 3 or 10% 
C+, 8 or 26.6% C—, 14 or 46.6% D and 4 or 13.3% E. For those 
who tested high, the teachers considered their talent A, B, or C+. 
For those who tested low, the teachers considered their talent C—, 
Dor 

20 


Teachers Rating of Highest 10% and Lowest 10% of Students according % Tésts 


1921 — 1922 
MusicAL TEMPERAMENT 
a Highest 10% Boeesh 10% 





CHART 19 


Chart 19 shows the teachers’ estimates of musical temperament 
for those who tested highest and lowest. The black pillars show 
how teachers rated musical temperament for those who tested high 
and the dotted pillars show how teachers rated musical temperament 
for those who tested low. For those who tested high, teachers’ 
estimates of temperament were mostly B and C+, and for those 
who tested low, teachers’ estimates were mostly D. 


Teachers’ Rating of Highest lo % and Lowest 10% of Students according to Tests 


1921-1922 
Rrvytnmic Action 
i Highest 1o% Lowest 10% 





MAES OVC Y 






High 10% AS3% 36.6 % 
° ° 10. RY) 36. 
A 8B cr Cu Oo 


CHART 290 


Chart 20 shows teachers’ estimates of rhythmic action for those 
who tested the highest and lowest. The black pillars, representing 
the teachers’ estimates of rhythmic action for those who tested high, 
again occupy the upper half of the scale, and the dotted pillars, 
representing the teachers’ estimates of rhythmic action for those who 


21 


tested low, occupy the lower half of the scale. These three charts 
show that private teachers have considered musical talent, musical 
temperament, and rhythmic action high for those who tested high 
and low for those who tested low. In other words, the tests classi- 
fied these pupils in the group similar to the one in which teachers 
classified them in their ratings of talent after they had taught them 
for a period of time. 


MEDIANS?” FOR THE HIGH 10% AND LOW 10% 


Tests High 10% Low 10% 
Sense of itch 25... 25 wan ee A (92) D_= (21) 
Sense of intensity.) 4655 eee es B_ (87) D\.€23) 
Sense of ‘Pime cven once wine ou Pegett(91) D_ (24) 
Sense of Consonance........... B (87) C— (37) 
‘Lonal Memory. cas Ge eee tee Le ee) I ystzu; 
Auditory Imagery. 2 2¢ak. ass A (90) Bee A eo) 

Teachers’ Ratings 
Apparent... alent, ne. ene + an B D 
Ouality OF Lone hier a ae oe (Ser C— 
Rhythmic Action si oan eee B D 
Musical Temperament......... B D 
WLechnig ue -cauihiie Vek antes geeks B C— 
Achievement. dus ie oo vei eee (oe C-— 
FIDPLCAtiOn: ea aoe ter vet as B BE 5 


For those who tested the highest, the median in pitch is A or 92, 
in intensity B or 87, in time A or 91, in consonance B or 87, in 
memory A or 96, inimagery A or 90. For those who tested the low- 
est, the median in each test is D or 21, D or 23, D or 24, C— or 37, 
D or 20, C+ or 52. 

The medians for each item rated by teachers occur in B or C+ 
for those who tested high and C— or D, except in application, for 
those who tested low. 


TESTS OF THOSE. RATED BY -TEACHE RSS iia 
HIGHEST AND LOWEST IN TALENT 


In the previous charts, we were considering teachers’ estimates of 
talent for those who tested highest and lowest. Chart 21 shows the 
distribution of test results for those whom teachers rate the highest 
and the lowest in talent. The solid line is the distribution of test 
results for those who were rated A and B in talent by their private 
teachers, and the broken line is the distribution of test results for 
those who were rated D and E in talent by their private teachers. 
Those whom the teachers considered A and B in talent tested all 





10Medians are the points above which and below which an equal number of 
cases fall. The numbers in parentheses after the medians for tests are the per- 
centile ranks or numerical tests ranks. 


22 


the way from A to D with the most testing B. Those whom the 
teachers considered D and E in talent tested all the way from B to. E 
with the most testing C— and D. There is a noticeable correspond- 


248 Students — Test Ratings of Best and Poorest Students 
1921-1922 


—a Sti ae 
_ an Reiter Stodeniethsce feres 0S 8 Sade. BY Reacher 













Tests 
CHART 21 


ence here between the test results and the teachers’ estimates of 
talent. Those who are rated A and B in talent by teachers, test in 
the upper half of the scale and those who are rated D and E by 
teachers, test in the lower half of the scale. 


TESTS AND TEACHERS’ RATINGS FOR THOSE 
TESTED IN 1921-1922 


Chart 22 shows an individual comparison of the test results and 
teachers’ ratings of talent for 248 students tested in 1921-1922. 
There were 30 students with ratings of talent from two teachers, 
making a total of 278 ratings. This group includes adults and 
children studying piano, violin, voice, organ, cello and harp. 38% 
of the cases are in exact agreement, this means that they were rated 
_ by teachers in the same classification as they tested. 68% were 
classified by teachers either in the same group which they tested or 
in the group next to it. Of twenty-one students who made A in 
the tests, not one was rated by teachers below C+ in talent. 


23 


Of 117 who made A and B in tests, only five were rated D and E 
by teachers. Later ratings in talent by teachers moved one of the 
E ratings up to C, and one of the D ratings to C+. The three 


ToTAL -248 STuDENTS) 



















TJeEacHers 
RATING 


A 










TEACHERS 
RATING 


B 






TeEAcHers 
RATING 
Cr 


TEACHERS 
RATING 
C~ 










TEACnhEes 
FRarine 


BD) 


© Students taking two courses. v The Minor Couree 


Exact Agreement 38% of cases 

Agreement within one step 68% " * 

Disagreement of more than 6% * " 
two steps 


CHART 22 


others have discontinued. None of the ratings of talent above D 
were lowered to the D and E group by later ratings. 

Of twenty-one who made D and E in the tests, three were rated 
above C— in talent, one was rated Al! and two were rated C+ in 
talent. Eighteen were rated below average in talent. All the 





This pupil who tested D, was rated A in voice, her minor subject, and C— in 
piano, her major subject. She did not continue long enough to receive further 
ratings. 

24 


twenty-one who tested D and E discontinued before later ratings of 
talent were made by teachers. 


Of thirty-five who tested C—, four were rated above C+ in-talent 
by teachers. Later ratings in talent moved the one A rating to 
C+, two of the B ratings to C+ and C, the other one who was rated 
B discontinued. None of those who were rated C+ and below 
received later ratings in the A and B groups. 


It is information of this kind that should convince the administra- 
tion of a music school not to accept those who are testing D and El 
and consider those who are testing C— as doubtful. If the school, 


200 PANo STUDENTS 
1921 - 1922. 


TE ST. 
A B Cr os C- D E 


TEACHERS 
RATING 





TeEAcHeres 
FATING 
= 
© Students taking two courses. wv The Minor Course 
Exact Agreement 41% of cases 


Agreement within one step 69% " “ 
Disagreement of more than 3% " 4 
two steps 


CHART 23 


25 


had not admitted, previous to further knowledge, all those who made 
D and E in the tests, twenty-one of the 248, or 8.4% would have 
been refused admission. Of these, only one would have had superior 
talent in voice, and only two others would have had talent of C+ 
(high average), assuming that the teachers’ ratings were correct. 
If all who made C—, D and E in the tests had not been admitted, 
55 or 22.5% would have been refused admission. Of these, five 
would have had A and B talent according to the teachers”. 


Chart 23 shows the relation between test results and teachers’: 
ratings of talent for 200 piano students. There is exact agreement 
in 41% of the cases, and agreement within one step in 69% of the 
cases. 


JANUARY, 1924, STATUS OF STUDENTS TESTED IN 
1921-1922 


After a period of two and one-half years, the writer wondered 
how many of the first group of students tested, the group of 248 
shown in charts 22 and 23, remained in the school. This question 
is answered in chart 24. The upper part of this chart shows that 
none of those who tested D and E remained in the school, nine of 
the 35 C— ones remained, 6 of the 15 C ones remained, 46 of the 91 
C-++ ones remained, 60 of the 106 B ones remained and 14 of the 21 
A ones remained. In the lower half of the chart, the percentage of 
those in each group who continued in the school is indicated by the 
height of the black pillars. There is a gradual increase in the height 
of the pillars. This shows that those who test highest tend to re- 
main in the school the longest. This fact is not wholly the result 
of action by the school, because the administration of the school had 


Jan. 1924 Status of Sruoents TESTED IN 192)-22 


Number tested in 1921-22 
Number in School Jon 1924. 


Percentage of those tested nn 1921-22 
remaining in Schoo! Jon 1924 








° 6% 40% 51% 57% 67% 
€ | C= Gc Cr B A 
CHART 24 





2 Of these five, two have discontinued, and the other three have been rated by 
the same teachers as C+, C + and C in talent, respectively. This leaves no A or 
B talent according to teachers for those who tested C—, D and E. 


26 


discontinued only a few pupils previous to this time. It is due, in 
most part, to a natural fluctuation caused by the voluntary with- 
drawal of those who left. 

If those who test highest continue their music study the longest 
and those who test lowest continue their music study the shortest 
time, why admit to the school those who test the lowest? The 
higher the standard of admission, the greater the stability in student 
enrollment. And continuity of musical study is essential to the 
greatest development of the school itself and the pupils enrolled. 


Ties lovaN) TEACHERS “RATINGS sFOR THOSE 
ES beet GLO ES bo 22 


218 STUDENTS “256 RaTINGS 


OcTOBER 1922 
TE sts 
AS Cc 


TEACHERS 
RATING 





Th ‘ 
@Students taking two courses v The Miner Course 


Exact Agreement 28% of cases 
Agreement within one step 178% of cases 
Disngreement of more than 5% of cases 
two steps 
CHART 25 


27 


In October, 1922, a second group of 218 entering students were 
tested. Chart 25 shows the relation between test results and 
teachers’ estimates of talent for this group. Of those who tested A, 
one received a rating by the teacher as low as C— in talent, but this 
was a rating in secondary piano. Of those who tested B, eight were 
rated D and E in talent by their teachers. Later ratings of these 
eight students left none in E, and only one in D. The one person 
who tested E was rated C+t in talent by her teacher. This rating of 
C++ happened to be the lowest estimate of talent ever made by the 
teacher up to that time. Of those who tested D, only one was rated 
in talent above C—. Later ratings left only two students in the 
D group, one was rated C in talent, the other C—. 


JANUARY, 1924) STATUS OF STUDENTS Tres tre 
IN OCTOBER, 1922 


Chart 26 shows how many of the 218 students tested in October, 
1922, remained in the school after a period of one and one-half years. 
The one student who tested E has discontinued, 11% of those who 

Jan 1924 Status of Srovents TESTEO In Oct. 1922 


Bnumber tested in Oct. 1922 
Bnoumper in School Jon. 1924 


— A an ce 
1 0 18 2 Si 2 96 67 80 60 i2 11 
ed Oo c- Cr fey A 





Percentage of those Tested in Oct. 1922 


remaining nm School Jon. 924. 
ST % 7O% 5% 92% 
C- cr 


® A 





CHART 26 
tested D remained, 57% of those who tested C— remained, 70% 
of those who tested C remained, 75 % of those who tested B remained 
and 92% of those who tested A remained. This shows again the 
tendency for those who test the highest to continue their music 
study the longest. 


STUDENT FLUCTUATION IN A MUSIC SCHOOL 


The Eastman School of Music admits four groups of students, 
namely, the preparatory group (those of public school age), the 
degree group (those who are candidates for a Bachelor of Music 
degree), the certificate group (those who are candidates for an 
Eastman School Certificate), and the special group (adults who come 
for private lessons only). 


28 


After a period of one year, only 47% of those four groups who 
were low average and below in the tests and teachers’ ratings, re- 
_ mained in the school. Over one-half of the low talent had dis- 
continued voluntarily in less than a year. But of those who were 
above average (A or B) in the tests and teachers’ ratings, 84% re- 
mained in the school at the end of one year. Only one-sixth of them 
had discontinued voluntarily. 

After two and one-half years, 54.5% of the preparatory students 
remained, 70.4% of the degree students remained, 67% of the cer- 
tificate students remained, and 26.9% of the special students re- 
mained. The stability of the degree group is the greatest and that 
of the special group is the least; that is to say, the degree students 
stay in the school the greatest length of time, and the special 
students stay in the school the shortest length of time. 

In order to obtain the least possible voluntary flunctuation in 
student personnel, the first thing to do would be the selection of 
all students on the basis of the tests, the higher the test standard, 
the better the talent and the greater the continuity; the second move 
would be a more rigid selection of the special students. It should 
be the aim of any music school to reduce the percent of fluctuation 
in its enrollment to the lowest possible degree, both for the sake of 
the school and for those admitted to the school. In many cases, 
a person desiring admission to a music school has no serious inten- 
tion of continuing study for any length of time. The influence of a 
friend or parent, or the desire for a pastime bring many to the doors 
of a music school, many who may have very little talent. The 
economic waste involved for the school, and the vocational waste 
for the student are great enough to demand consideration. Those 
who have talent worth developing should be encouraged during 
their public school age when so many drop by the wayside musically, 
and in this group there is no small number of boys. 

I hope the time is not far distant when the music world will 
rally to the need of seeking out those who are more talented, not 
by chance, but by a systematic, scientific procedure, and then 
make every effort possible to help them continue their musical 
interest and achievement over a normal period of time. This will 
give us a new approach to the teaching of music, a new musical 


pedagogy. 


29 


1924 
Pi ANO 


EASTMAN ScHoor of Music 
JAN. 


ge of Ratings of High Average and above given by Individual Teachers 


ZA fercentoge of High Average and above by Tests 


Fl Fercenta 


Z 


i % a 8 


8 
ha RE EG Ee 
a nog SSS 


KAAS fal ae ii i Re 



















TENEN TANG NUNS SSN RENEE INCINE NENT NSS Se 





SSS 
| DEA ATS BEI LAR ADSB BEETS) 


gop 


LESS SNCAESENING RNC pS AK NAANNAAS oO 


BING ANC NE NEN RON IRENE NENG on Ww 


PEN TIN EN NINE NER IONE NE 





NINCNENGNCAENEN NEALE NER ERO NES SN 
DABTEiS AS aE ean 








| 
DAA RAAINANANAAARANANS N 


INIRANANNAAKANARANANNANRAA 
Ee (a ES Ra 


Luo yesh eae 
WTS SSS SSSI SAAS 


DLA VS Ws Was Sy INN ARANANNAAN 
SESSSN WEES EAE) REDS 


DARAARAANNNNANRAAARANANANNAAN 


PEA NANAAAARANAIANAANSASNARAN Xs) 


SSNSNESNENSAN UNEVEN ON DU SS 


DS BANRANTIVANABNANANNARNAIANS 






Tesh Ave 89.5 







































WS ANANANNANARANARANNIKAANANSANAS 
PACK ASSERGNA TANNINS AEN AEN 
SS (SST WSS GS A CE Se Ce 


KAARAARAANNANANSNAN LANAAN 










CHART 27 


TEACHERS’ RATINGS OF TALENT 


Twice a year each pupil in the school taking private lessons is 
rated in talent’ by the teacher. Some teachers are known to rate 
all their pupils C+, B, or A in talent, the lowest rating being C+; 
and other teachers rate their pupils C+, C—, D and E, the highest 
rating being C+. This gives an entirely different meaning to the 
C+ rating of these teachers. In order to present this situation to 
the faculty, certain charts were sent to each teacher in the school. 
Chart 27 gives the January comparison of teachers’ ratings of talent. 
The height of the black pillars shows the percentage of pupils rated 
C+, B and A by each teacher. The height of the barred pillars 
shows the percentage of each teacher’s pupils who tested C+, B 
and A. Looking at the black pillars for a moment, you will see 
that the first teacher rated 83% of his pupils C++, B and A in talent. 
leaving 17% to be rated C— or below. The last piano teacher on 
the chart rated 6% of her pupils C+, B and A in talent, leaving 
94% of them to be rated C— and below in talent. For the whole 
department, 44.5% of the piano pupils were rated C+, B and A 
in talent by teachers. The barred pillars show that 80% of the 
first teacher’s pupils tested C+, B and A in talent, and 66% of 
the last teacher’s pupils tested C++, B and A. For the piano de- 
partment, 80.3% tested C++, B and A in talent. 


The black pillars vary in height from the tall one, 83 points high, 
to the short one, 6 points high. One could easily infer that the 
first teacher has all of the best pupils of the school and the last 
teacher has the poorest pupils of the school, or that the first teacher 
is very easy in rating and the last teacher very severe; but neither 
assumption is necessarily true. This variation is an example of 
the “personal equation,’’ which enters into each teacher’s ratings. 
Both teachers may or may not be exacting of good results. When 
the administration of a school must take a teacher’s estimate of 
talent into consideration, it is necessary to have the scope of one 
teacher’s estimates more in harmony with the scope of another 
teacher’s estimates. The C+ rating of one teacher must have, as 
nearly as possible, the same significance as the C+ rating of another 
teacher. 


The barred pillars vary in height from 100% for one teacher to 
66% for another teacher. The variation in height of the barred 
pillars is not as great as the variation in height of the black pillars. 
This is due to the one norm or standard of comparison for those 

13°This rating is the first item on the rating blank, Appendix 3. 

31 


tested. No doubt as many as twenty-three standards of comparison 
were used by the piano teachers, one for each teacher. 


The following information was sent with a copy of this chart to 
each teacher. 

Each black pillar represents one teacher’s percent of ratings in musical talent 
of high average and above (C+, B, A). The greatest difference in teachers’ 
estimates is evident by comparing the pillar at the extreme left with that at the 
extreme right. The teacher at the left is rating a greater proportion of his pupils 
above the average than the teacher at the right. It is not necessarily true that the 
teacher at the left has a larger percent of talented pupils. It is difficult when this 
difference in teachers’ ratings occurs to know if the C++ of one teacher would be the 
C-+ of another teacher. The same pupil has been rated A in talent by one teacher 
and C-+ in talent by a second teacher. When this has occurred, the C+ rating 
usually represented the highest rating given to any pupil by the-second teacher, so 
that the second teacher’s C+ rating is comparable to the first teacher’s A rating. 
This use of different standards is obviously unfair to students. 


The pillars at the right of each black one show the percent of each teacher’s 
pupils who tested high average and above (C+, B, or A) in the psychological 
tests. The differences in the heights of the test pillars are less than in those of 
the teachers. This is due to the use of the same norm for the test results of all 
students. This norm extends from E (those who are the poorest in the tests), 
through D, C—, C+, B and to A (those who are the best in the tests). If one 
receives A in the tests it does not mean perfection; it merely indicates that the 
person is one of the highest 10% of an unselected group. 


The solid horizontal line shows the percent of students rated high average and 
above (C+, B, A) in musical talent by all the teachers of the department. 


The broken horizontal line shows the percent of students who tested high aver- 
age and above (C+, B, A) for the department. 

Your ratings for January, 1924, are represented by pillar— 

In June, 1924, the individual teacher’s ratings of talent were 
again shown (chart 28) with the teachers’ pillars arranged in the 
same order in which they occurred in January, 1924 (chart 27). 
Each teacher retains the same position on the chart but you will 
notice that the black pillars in chart 28 do not descend in height as 
they did in chart 27. There is considerable variation in the per- 
centage of pupils rated by teachers C+, B and A in talent in June, 
as compared with the ratings in January of the same year. Ap- 
proximately the same pupils were rated by the same teacher in both 
January and June. Teacher number 15 had the greatest change in 
pupils for the June ratings, only two-thirds of his pupils were the 
same. All the other teachers had three-fourths or more of the same 
pupils whom they rated in talent in January and again in June. 


The percentage of ratings in talent of C++, B and A for all pupils 
of the piano department increased from 44.5% in January to 62% 
in June. 


The percentage of those who tested C+, B and A increased 1.8% 
from January to June. 


ae 


June 1924 


EASTMAN ScHooL or Music 


, Ndividual Teachers. 
é Féreentage of High Average ond above by Tests 


ie Fercentage of Ratings of High Average ond above given by 


RANO. 





ERD BSCR Ne a 
aes 
Ro Bae 
STS TM Cd GEES ie Scr Sera eae 
SSNS CaS TERS SATS 
DAG Md Se as 
necms an aE 
GE SES BSS 
ee 
is 
oe | Gomaeaens 
= SSSAST ASH SSESS EN SSS ie) 
aa eon pea panes [icp EN 
Rous RSSASS SSE SSS rat 
URE RINT ETE EO 
GROOT AS eter AY Be TS 
‘ [e) fe) 


CHART 28 


The following information accompanied a copy of each chart 


sent to individual teachers. 


Look for your number on chart The height of the black pillar shows the 
percent of your students whom you rated as C+, B or A in talent in June, 1924. 
The height of the diagonally lined pillar at the right of the black pillar shows the 
percent of your students who tested C+, B or A. 

Piano. In January, 1924, the piano teachers rated 44.5 percent of their 
students as C+, Bor Aintalent. In June, 1924, 62 percent of the students were 
rated by teachers as C+, B and A in talent. 

Voice. In January, 1924, the voice teachers rated 54.9 percent of their students 
as C+, BorAintalent. In June, 1924, 62.2 percent of their students were rated 
C+, B or A in talent. 

Violin. In January, 1924, the violin teachers rated 58.9 percent of their 
students as C+, B or Aintalent. In June, 1924, 72.0 percent of their students 
were rated C+, B or A in talent. 

Organ. In January, 1924, the organ teachers rated 59.0 percent of their 
students as C+, Bor Aintalent. In June, 1924, 96.3 percent of their students 
were rated C+, B or A in talent. 

’Cello. In January, 1924, the ’cello teachers rated 38.4 percent of their students 
as C+, Bor Aintalent. In June, 1924, 55.5 percent of their students were rated 
C+, B or A in talent. 

Harp. In January, 1924, the harp teachers rated 42.8 percent of their students 
FEY +,BorAintalent. In June, 1924, 46.1 percent were rates as C+, B or Ain 
talent. 

You are teacher number 








Besscaess of Ratings of High Average and above 
given by Individual Teachers. 


y Fercentage of High Average and above 
(A by Tests. 


1924 






ral 
ing 
oF? 

6 


£ 
? 
6 
e 


wax 
5 



























Y] Test Ave. 63. I I 

is Area Ae eee 

He — a ee 

Hag oo fh | JJ Ve 

Baga en ob Vr a vl er 

a HE i A 

A) ae fe a i 

mn Ce ee 

BARA | i 
24° 25°26" (27 ene 


CHART 29 
34 


The percentage of teachers’ talent ratings of C+, B and A and 
the test results of C-++, B and A for each teacher’s pupils are shown 
for the departments of voice (chart 29), of violin (chart 30), of 
organ (chart 31), of ’cello (chart 32), and of harp (chart 33) for 
the mid-year, January, 1924, and the last of the year, June, 1924. 

In the voice department for January, 1924, the first teacher rated 
93 % of his pupils C+, B and A in talent, the last teacher rated 20% 
of her pupils C+, B and A in talent, a difference in percentage of 
73 units. In June, the highest percentage of ratings of C+, B and 
A is 92% and the lowest is 36%, a difference of 56 units. For the 
voice department, 55% of the pupils were rated C+, B and A in 
talent by teachers in January and 62% were rated thus in June. 
The same percentum tested C+, B and A in January as in June. 


# Fercentage of Ratings of High Average 
Mond above given by Individual Teachers 
Aig ericse of High Average and above 
Y 








by Tests. 
1924 
JUNE . 
e VIOLIN 
Co 
i : 
ee ee 1-1 — 
Pn ap iL 70 A_t 2 a 
l me a A il 
in ie AAA ty A 
A) Ay 
Vii * Wen Wd 
ANY Aa | Ul Wa 
Cee © A en Mn 
NE) 
No. SORP Ol Ol Oot oe, SO OO eeOL eae Dt Bt. hooey Ca 


CHART 30 


In the violin department for January, 1924, the first teacher 
rated 74% of his pupils C+, B and A in talent, the last teacher 
rated 48% C+, B and A in talent, a difference of 26 units. In 
June, the highest percentage of ratings of C+, B and A is 96% and 


35 


the lowest is 48 %, a difference of 48 units. The department average 
of C+, B and A talent rating in January is 59%, in June it was 
raised to 72%. The average of C+, B and A decreased from 83.3% 
in January to 82% in June. 


Bi csetese of Ratings of High Average 
and above given by Individual Teachers. 
7] Percentage of High Average and above 
Z by Tests. 


1924 





















al Re 
90|-4 A 90 |e ee a 
fe eee 
Hee) SA 
A a 
| Sa 
GA | 
Been BO 
We a 
A) Se 
i a ma io MONO 
AME A) 
‘No 56 37T 58 39 AO S36 3ST 3B 39 40 


In the organ department for January, 1924, the first teacher rated 
all his pupils C+-, B and A in talent, and the last teacher rated none 
of his pupils C++, B and A in talent, a difference in percentage of 
100 units. In June, four teachers rated all their pupils C+, B and 
A in talent and the lowest percentage is 83%, a difference of 17 
units. The department average of C+, B and A in talent ratings 
in January is 59%, in June it was raised to 96%. The average of 
C+, B and A tests increased from 80% in January to 83% in June. 


36 


Fercentage of Ratings of High Average 

and above given by Individual Teachers 
Aiea. 29 of High Average and Above 
g by Tests 


1924 
JAN JUNE 


3 
7, CELLO 
loo 




















Test 


| 
> 
é 


® 
uw 
u 
y 







2 
5S | 










| 


OREN ES EREN 


— 


WS ANAANAANANAAANANANAAANANA 


KAN AAANANNAANANARANANNAANANARANASNAS 


‘4 


Al A2 A 


CHART 32 





Wee SES LE 
BO SAS ee 





Teacher ° 
No. 


iS 
hv 


In the ’cello department for January, 1924, the first teacher rated 
51% of his pupils C++, B and A in talent, and the second teacher 
rated 28% of his pupils C+, B and A intalent, a difference of 23 
units. In June, the first teacher rated only 33% C+, Band A in 
talent, and the second teacher rated 77% C+, Band A in talent, a 
difference of 44 units. The department average of C+,B and A 
talent ratings in January is 38%, in June it was raised to 55.5%. 
The average of C+, B and A tests remained the same in January 
as in June. 


37 


Petpet et Rotings of High Average 
Gnd above given by Individual Teachers. 

A ireetcas of High Average and above. 
4a by Tests. 


: 
: 


Y 
y 
f 
j 
y 
j 
y 
y 
/ 





aS 
O! 





CHART 33 


In the harp department there is only one teacher. 43% of her 
ratings in talent in January were C+, B and A, 46% of her ratings 
in talent in June were C+, Band A. Theaverage of C+, BandA 
tests increased from 66.6% in January to 72.7% in June. 


38 


SUMMARY OF DATA REGARDING TEACHERS’ 
RATINGS AND TESTS 


Teachers’ Ratings of C+, Band A 


Department January, 1924 June, 1924 
Piano 44.5% 62.0% 
Voice 54.9% 66.8% 
Violin 58.9% 81.6% 
Organ 59.0% 96.6% 
Cello 38.4% Spr inee 
Harp 42.8% 46.1% 
All departments 48.8% 63°,1.% 

Test Results of C+, B and A 

Department January, 1924 June, 1924 
Piano 80.3% 82.1% 
Voice 63.0% 62.9% 
Violin 83.3% 82.0% 
Organ 80.0% 82.8% 
"Cello 8353: % 83.3% 
Harp 66.6% (201% 
All departments 76.1% 120% 


TEST RESULTS AND TEACHERS’ ESTIMATES FOR 
TWO SELECTED GROUPS 


The Low Group 


All of the talent charts classified D and E during a three-year 
period were selected to investigate what had happened to those 
students who tested low. There are 149 D and E talent charts in 
all, 142 of these are the charts of preparatory and special pupils, 
and seven of them are the charts of regular course students (degree 
and certificate). Of the 142 special and preparatory pupils, 40 
were not admitted or did not enter for some reason after being 
tested, 40 were dropped by the school, 43 discontinued voluntarily, 
and 19 remained. Of the 40 dropped by the school, 32 were dropped 
in less than a year, and 8 of them before the end of a second year. 
Of the 43 who discontinued voluntarily, 39 left in less than a year’s 
time and 4 before the end of the second year. 

Of these 83 pupils (40 who were dropped and 43 who discontinued 
voluntarily) who tested D or E, 8 of them had received a talent 
rating of C+ from their private music teachers, 9 had a talent rating 


39 


of C, 28 had a talent rating of C—, 18 had a talent rating of D, 11 
had a talent rating of E and 9 had no record of a talent rating from 
teachers. 

Of the 19 D and E pupils who remained, the last ratings by their 
teachers are 1 B, 6 C+, 7 C, 3 C—, 1 D and one with no rating. 

Only one of the seven regular course students remained. Of the 
6 who left school, teachers’ ratings of talent were 1 C+, 2 C, 1 C—, 
2 D. The one student remaining has a year’s record of marks in 
practical and theoretical studies of 3 C+, 3 C, 5 D and 2 E. 


The High Group 


The same number of talent charts were selected for those who 
made the highest scores in the tests. These talent charts included 
all of the A talent charts and enough of the highest B talent charts 
to total 149. 


There are 116 of these highest charts for preparatory and special 
students and 33 for regular course students. 


Of the 116 special and preparatory pupils, all of them were en- 
rolled in the school for lessons, none of them have been dropped by 
the school, 39 discontinued voluntarily and 77 remained. Of the 
39 who discontinued voluntarily, 14 left in less than a year’s time 
and 25 after one or two years. The teachers’ ratings of talent for 
the 39 pupils who discontinued are 2 A, 5 B, 15 C+, 11 C, 2 C—, 2 
D and 1 E, and two have no record. Of the 77 remaining, teachers’ 
estimates of talent are 11 A, 27 B, 23 C+, 12 C, 2 C— and two have 
no record. 


Of the 33 regular course students, 15 discontinued from the school 
and 18 remain. Of the 15 who left, 6 graduated, 1 went into an 
orchestra, 2 had poor health, 1 transferred to a course in architecture. 
There is no record for the other 5. Teachers’ ratings for those who 
left are 5 A,6B,5C+,2C,1@C—. For those who remain, teachers’ 
estimates of talent are 5 A, 13 B, 2 C+,2C,1C-. 


Chart 34 shows the distribution of teachers’ estimates of talent 
for those who tested D and E and for those who tested A and B. 
The solid line distributes teachers’ talent ratings for those who tested 
D and E. The broken line distributes teachers’ talent ratings for 
those who tested A and B. 


For the 149 who tested D and E, 50 or 33.5% had no rating in 
talent by teachers, 11 or 7.3% of the ratings in talent were E, 21 
or 14% of the ratings in talent were D, 32 or 21.3% of the ratings in 
talent were C—, 20 or 13.3% of the ratings in talent were C, 15 or | 


40 


10% of the ratings in talent were C+, 1 or 0.6% of the ratings in 
talent was B, and none were rated A in talent. 


Comporison of Test Results and Teachers’ Rating 


for two selected Groups 


fer Cent of 4 
Cases Roe if 
Ao 40 


O 30 
Dand E in Tests 
i Aand © in Tests \ 






Record aa D es = ee C+ B A 
DedE 335 15>: wee Ret of = i aN {0.0 66 oO 
cher. 
Aod B Zo 62 12 *3 9 65 ie 28> 529 14.4 
Tested Dond & Tested A ord B. 


129 (66.7%) Notenroiled Sept 1924  54(32%) 
20 03.3%) Remaining Sept i924 = 95063-T%) 


CHART 34 


For the 149 who tested A and B, 4 or 2.5% had no rating in talent 
by teachers, 1 or 0.6% of the ratings in talent was E, 2 or 1.2% of 
the ratings in talent were D, 6 or 3.7% of the ratings in talent were 
C—, 27 or 16.9% of the ratings in talent were C, 45 or 28.3% of the 
ratings in talent were C+, 51 or 32.0% of the ratings in talent were 
B, 23 or 14.4% of the ratings in talent were A. 

At the end of three years, 86.7% or 129 of those who tested D 
and E were not enrolled in the school, only 13% or 20 of them were 
continuing their music lessons. But of those who tested A and B 
only 36% or 54 of them were not enrolled in the school, 63.7% or 
95 of them were continuing their music study. 


41 


CONCLUSION 


Influenced by the information presented in this report, the faculty 
of the Eastman School of Music decided to admit only those ap- 
plicants whose musical talent warrants some continuity of musical 
training. You might immediately wonder what effect this has on 
those who are refused admission to the school. You might also 
consider what effect this selection of pupils has on those who are 
admitted to the school. What is the significance of giving musical 
training to those who are more capable of receiving it? And what 
does this selection of talent mean to the music school and its staff 
of competent teachers? What will it mean to the musical growth of 
the future, to the real conservation of musical talent? 

Dissipation of energy is one of the greatest diversions of our 
present day efforts. We are blindly groping for what we think we 
want and should have. There is so much to do, we must try a 
little of everything. The increased number of things to do is, in 
itself, cause for the guidance and direction of energies in the paths 
where the effort exerted brings the best results. This very thing we 
are attempting to do for those who wish to study music. 

Those whose talent does not warrant the expenditure of money 
and time for private music lessons are advised accordingly. If they 
were admitted to the school, they would not stay long enough to 
benefit themselves or anyone else. We are being most fair to close 
the road of private lessons to those who thought they would start 
but had little or no desire to go very far. These people are not very 
happy on this road even though they venture part of the way. 

This selection of students naturally increases the number of 
applicants to the school, and this increase of applicants may include 
a large number of those who have little talent for the reason that 
those who are in doubt about their own capacity for musical studies 
apply for admission to the school in order to be advised. Those 
applicants who are admitted to the school are stimulated to greater 
effort for the reason that they were permitted to study in the school. 

There are many ways in which a music school profits by this selec- 
tion of its student personnel. First of all, there is less fluctuation 
in the student enrollment—the greater the talent, the longer the pupil 
remains in the school. This gives the teachers an opportunity to 
do more consistent and intensive work. The whole tone of the 
school is raised; an atmosphere of industry and happiness prevails 
to a greater extent than it could in any other way. Continuity 
of worthwhile student personnel is the life of the school. The 


42 


coming and going of poor talent, if allowed to increase in numbers, 
would be the death of the school. 

The faculty of the school is affected directly by the personnel 
of its students. It is the aim of any school to have as competent a 
teaching staff as possible. These competent teachers are deserving 
of the best talent we can give them. Why should a school obtain 
the best of teachers and give them any pupils who wish to study, 
poor talent as well as good talent? Can any school really afford to 
pay a teacher the same amount to teach poor talent as it does for 
good talent? Financially, the situation may be well balanced, but 
musically, there can be an enormous loss or gain for pupils, teachers 
and school. Gaining musically must be the ultimate aim of musical 
schools over the country. And I believe the first and best way to 
gain musically would be the intensive training of the best musical 
talent. This, in the end, will lead to the greatest musical growth and 
happiness. 


43 


APPENDIX 


1. Questionary for adults. 
2. Questionary for children. 


3. Rating blank for use of teachers. 


i—QUESTIONARY FOR ADULTS 


The University of Rochester Eastman School of Music 


Supplementary to the Measures of Musical Talent, you are asked 
to co-operate in answering the following questions specifically and 
frankly. Your answers are considered confidential. 


GENERAL LAYER ae. ee 
TCE) Sa CARAPACE cae cs ak) (Miss, Mrs. or Mr.) 
(directory style) 
MCMC i yc Streit Pte SP er ene a ke 
ETM Ge See yy Rte eae gl | ad Fs C25 tee ae ree eae Ra A 
(month date year) (town or country) 

TEESE Ye Ty cI 8 OE TR re at ae CT 

(Grammar School) (High School) (College, etc.) 

RAT TT SGN AT OTs CPR A LE, TE SSN EIT LAT Nao le lye Re Ase 
(present) (past) 

Ge interests: Vocational... .-..-.0 ek AVOCATIONAL oa eae 


MUSICAL ENVIRONMENT 


7. Name the musical instruments in your home..........................- 


TY Giilg UL SINGS Tel aera ee nel ek URN gs 
10. Does anyone outside your family come into your home to 


PURI CALE eal ieee aleshed UR Ap ea te GAC EE aR Eas ee UAE 


(Specify whether it is a friend, relative, artist, etc.) 


11. What musical literature have you in your home?.._.............-... 


12. About how many concerts did you attend last year?................ 
(September to June) 


Pea emt Oar th vee VOCAL sts weet wee er ee eae A er 
45 


MUSICAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING 


13. Approximate in chart below the number of private lessons 
you have had. | 


No. | Total No. | No. hrs. of | Total No. 
Kind yrs. of | mos. of lessons hrs. of | Remarks 
study study per mo. lessons 
Before high 
school 


During high 
school 


Since high 


school We 
14. Easy range of voice.in singing from.2. ee 
below middle: © tom Ca ee above octave C. 
15. Number of years study in harmony.........................----.---- history 
OF MUSIC hhh se ear training, kee 
public school methods.u-2).. 22 a 
16. Specify any other musical training you have had... 


MUSICAL ACTIVITY 
17. Have you played alone in public during the last three years? 


Ih a Aenea ee ek Sh what instrumentr...000 2. 
WROTE Pie os Ore Oe ae Cees how often?.......... 0 
18. Have you played in an orchestra or band?................... what 
instrument? pete eee how often? 20 ae 
19.. Have you:sung-aloneiin publichiaw42 Nie eee where? 


how often?.... ee 


20. Have you sung in a choir, chorus, glee club, quartet, opera? 


WHOLE Delite ieal eee how long? i... 


What part did ‘you sing? 20. ei 
46 


ya 
pag 


23; 


24. 


hos 
26. 


Leni YOU Carry rastune Gasulyt cies et ees So! ae: 
Name the most difficult musical selection you can play or sing 
BEASOTIOOLY Well aloneael ae oN ke ee LD te Lr ae 
Are you professionally engaged in music?.............. If so, in 


WAC CA Gree LN ie ee ee eee a greta 


HO WOU MOvise tsa To what extent? -e@u a. 
PPO ;VereOn pose! ye Te yi Voowhatextent?. uo toon ys. 
Dawou play by ear? PEGE WAR EXTEN E 0c une ad 


MUSICAL INTERESTS 


(ue 
28. 
29. 
30. 


31, 
32. 
33. 
34. 
35. 
a6. 


What kind of musical concert appeals to you most?._................ 
WOdt CVO OmanIsiC appeals tO your. er we 
Wi ne -aresvour favorite composers? 2.30.2) 
Describe your feeling or reaction when listening to music that 
BAB aM CUMETOS G5 pc eer aos ay ee el, Sh 
What type of music aroused this feeling?........-..0..2222 
Has this experience or any other occurred repeatedly?.......... 
What kind of music bores you or gives you displeasure?...._....... 
State at least two reasons why you are studying music.............. 
Do you plan to work for a Bachelor of Music degree?.............. 


Do you plan to make music an avocation or a vocation?............ 


MUSICAL MEMORY AND IMAGINATION 


37. 
38. 
39. 


40. 


Explain if possible how easily you memorize...........-..-----------..--- 
What devices are used to aid in memorizing?.............-....-------.---- 
In the absence of musical stimulation can you hear in detail 
Previotisry Heard Melo teataeee Un ee lh ecu ane ek 
Do you ever hear in your mind melodies of your own creation? 


BAMA. oo ol If so, are you able to play or sing them? 


47 


idl 
13. 


14. 
Bi 


16. 


2—QUESTIONARY FOR CHILDREN 


SN Bene ee el OS Sah i 


(last name) (first name) (boy or girl) 


WN aronalityorifatierst 3. eee tee Of Mother 242 =e 
y (GeCh pation Or LALMen ase gen, eee of mother .c. ae 


BOA OC ILE Ce lata Leta ae tees Place otpirth: 25s 


(month date year) (town or city) 


. UDG Of) Private: Schoolsnie ar a 7. Grade 


(number or name) 


. Name the musical instruments in your home................... 


Whorin ivour family singee. cee oe 2 ee 


. Who: plays these instruments fico .3:...2....,....4-- ee 
10. 
HE 


Do you sing or play together in your home?............--.22--..-.- 


At what places do you hear good music?._._.._._.........-.- ee 


Name three musicians you have heard and like to hear..... 


Number of years study in the music school....................... 


Number of half-hour private lessons on the piano........... 


On-any other instrament coe 


Dovyou iplay by @articko oe ee 


. Have you played a musical instrument in public? 2. 
PUONe-OT WILD PTONDT oo eee What instrument?_.___ ae 
TOW OLteN ee a ee Where?..6o.0.00 0000. 22d. 
. Name the most difficult selection you can play well.................- 
. What musical instrument do you like best? = a ee 
- What kind of music do you like, best? 00... ee f 
. Do you ever hear melodies in your mind?._...__..--.---.----------0ce---eeeee 
Are they familiar melodies or new ones?................--.-----sces:e---e0e-ce 


Can you sing or play them?.2...2 213) 
48 


3—RATING BLANK FOR USE OF TEACHERS 


wretensnennneenntnnenn JUBPNYs Sy} JUSNe} VACY noA S4JUOU JO JOquINAY 


PTET TTTTTT TIT TTT TTT TELL =“ 9YOJ jSo}eoIt) TE ee te a eR Page SA RLM ok jsoyeaIt) 
Se--s aoa atmaaeweae me we | oe we ww em wee ew jf we eww wm we wr wrewe | Ke eg ew 3 ewe Tw = ee Jee cecrccescomercesccseserectesccecs HLIVAH 6 
wee fe ewe ee ee | a wm nm em em ew |] cm nmr er men nn] ec mf — a = |p ropssardxa [BoIsnuL pus anbju 

yoor u] Ssa1s01d ‘LNAWAADIHOV ‘8 
Be fa, Sah eg oe aga cae) ace vous omnmmiee) fo ewe ast ewes eee, ew ee Vere ww eek )| Pd ere mw ere eee: mk) wa pee ee mee ee fee me ee we ey me eee | Pew me me ew ee te u01}U944B 
pus  4saloju] pouleysns ‘aoyovid ul 
SSOUNJ YB “FONSI -NOLLVOIIddV 2 
ma ee ey ee ee Se Be he ee ee ee HE oS ae, f | ecteties ker | [Pre gence a eames YONAYITTIALNI mt) 


= ay ee wee Nee A eg Me ee ee ie een ee me am fern ereeee teen eter cnet ecenenesernsacnnensnnroocooe> SUIBUIS Ul 
Jo: sujAvid U} ATNOL dO ALITVAD 


mee eK] em mM mM mM em em mM eM em Mf] em a a a a nn ee ee a a a an a an an an 5 fy creer errs reer sercenecncoscocscsercoeces Sul says 
Io SulABid ul uorwseidxe oyugqyAys 
1oy AjIge ‘NOILOV OINHLIAHA ‘F 


a En ee ee ee ee a i mn Ce ee ES ma ra i ee A cg ce et ar Ba ak Et al a a oousWIOjIed 
Uy ANTIGB [BOJUBYOOW -“YOOINHOUL “& 


AS Ee eS SE Ii = ea ae a id a, A as eg rata eS, ate aT Ait Se nee eee? eee mle! Ta NO nN em gh ge cae ad SR See in ae ee fesuebanawresrst--asssrsos orate: (FO IRIO SOI Ty ul oAl3 
-B]YU] ‘UONBUISBUT] BAIZBOIN ‘yuaUITIEd 
-U19} 0198]918 -ONTITAGA IVOISOW “6 


we ie he ag * we heed Ngee ect oor age i ie Mein lerdal ibe aa Ss meee em ee Ke ee = ye ae Re aa ec ed ca (Poca bb umenupnons cUunaemnkedeCeespsieageasyewe Buyurely jo quo 
-pusdepul qUdUTSAVTYOV [BdISnUI 10} Ay 
-ovdevo U0qUu] *-LNATVL IVOISOW Tl 





i 


Vv a +0 —O K 
lojiadng pooy A1dA a3BIBAYV U3IH IZBIDAV MOT Sons Pry TeV 








—————————— 








UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-URBANA 


co 





